MR. FLEISCHER: Good afternoon. Let me give you a report on the
President's day. The President began early this morning with a phone
call to King Abdullah of Jordan. The two discussed the importance of
America's ongoing commitment to bringing peace to the region by working
with the parties in the region to help them find a path to peace. They
agreed about the vital role the United States is playing and will
continue to play in securing peace for the region. And they agreed
about the responsibilities of all three parties in the Mideast to take
actions necessary to help continue the progress that Secretary Powell
has made.

The President then began his morning briefings with the
intelligence community, as well as then with the FBI. And then he met
in the Oval Office earlier this morning with President Pastrana of
Colombia to discuss the Colombian government's efforts to fight
narco-trafficking, as well as the importance of trade initiatives the
United States is seeking to undertake with our neighbors in the south.

The President also held an event this morning in the Rose Garden to
present environmental youth awards to students from across the
country. And then he met with the Secretary of State and just
concluded that a few minutes ago, to receive a report about the
Secretary's travels to the region.

The President is, as we're speaking, having lunch with the Vice
President. And later this afternoon, the President will make remarks
about welfare reform and the next step in welfare reform, and discuss
the legislation that he has sent up to Capitol Hill to help improve the
lives of people who are on welfare.

And, finally, this evening the President will make remarks to the
National Fire and Emergency Services Dinner, and make special note of
the sacrifice and commitment our firefighters make, noting the events
of September the 11th, particularly.

Finally, before I take your questions, the President just moments
ago was informed about the incident in Milan. I have no additional
information for you at all at this time. This is a breaking story and
I do not have anything else beyond that, but the President has been
informed.

Q By who?

MR. FLEISCHER: By both Dr. Rice and Chief of Staff Card.

Q Can you tell us if you've been in touch with Italian
authorities on this?

MR. FLEISCHER: John, it literally is happening as I came out here,
and I have no additional information. I think you can presume that we
will be, if we are not already, in touch with Italian authorities and
we'll ascertain precisely what the facts are.

Q Any change in the U.S. alert status?

MR. FLEISCHER: Terry, I just walked out here. And so -- I've
shared with you all the information that I have on the topic.

Ron.

Q Do you know if that's a building where a lot of Americans are
--

MR. FLEISCHER: Ron.

Q On the Middle East, the President a few minutes ago praised
the Prime Minister for meeting his timetable for pulling out of the
Palestinian cities. I thought the timetable was immediate. And why
would anything less than that be acceptable to the President? And is
the President now for the first time justifying the siege on Arafat's
compound?

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, Ron, I was in the same room you were. What
the President said was that the Israeli withdrawal is continuing, that
the timetable that Prime Minister Sharon outlined to the President that
the Prime Minister is meeting. I think what you heard, Ron, was the
President refer to Ariel Sharon, as you know, in the phone call between
the President and the Prime Minister, when Ariel Sharon told the
President that they would be out of Jenin in a couple days, and Nablus
within a week. That's what the President was referring to.

Q Why is that acceptable to him, though, when he said two weeks
ago --

MR. FLEISCHER: The President, as he said in the Oval Office, said
that the withdrawal needs to continue.

Q And can I follow up on that? The President's words were, the
Prime Minister gave me a timetable and he has met that. Why would it
be wrong to conclude, then, that Israeli operations, in particular in
Jenin and in Nablus and in Bethlehem were conducted according to a
timetable that had the approval of the President of the United States,
and that he didn't really mean it when he said, Israeli troops -- now
almost two weeks ago -- must withdraw without delay?

MR. FLEISCHER: Terry, I think you're hearing absolutely nothing
new in this, and that -- you heard this, and Secretary Powell, when
he was in the region, referred to the progress that he is making. And
when people said, can you cite the progress that you're making, the
Secretary indicated and the administration indicated -- the President
did it again today -- that now there is a timetable for withdrawal.

If you recall, when the Secretary went to the region, Israel was on
its way into the West Bank. It was an open-ended operation, there was
no discussion about when they might come out. As a result of the
Secretary's efforts, there is a timetable for withdrawal. And what the
President indicated today is that Israel is honoring the timetable they
gave him on the phone.

Is it enough? No. The President has said that Israel needs to
continue the withdrawal. the President has made clear that all the
parties have to continue to honor the responsibilities he outlined in
the Rose Garden.

Q Let me just press you on this. That timetable obviously,
according to Prime Minister Sharon, included actions in Jenin and
Nablus and Bethlehem. And so what the President just said was he
didn't object to that timetable, that those operations -- as long as
Israel was withdrawing in some form or fashion -- were okay with this
administration.

MR. FLEISCHER: Terry, I can only say it as plain as day. The
President said the withdrawal needs to continue, and that's what the
President said. That is a call on Israel to make certain they do as
he's asked them to do, which is to withdraw.

Israel did give the President a timetable for Jenin and for Nablus,
and Israel is honoring the timetable. And that's what the President
reflected. I think that's an accurate statement, as you all know.

Helen?

Q When did the President change his mind about nation-building?

MR. FLEISCHER: Can you be more specific? What are you referring
to?

Q Well, the New York Times really strongly interprets his speech
yesterday -- something that you want to build -- now you're going
to take care of health, welfare, and education of the Afghans in the
aftermath of the hostilities. That's nation-building.

MR. FLEISCHER: The President has always been for those. I think
what you're getting --

Q He's always been for --

MR. FLEISCHER: Do you have any evidence to the contrary?

Q Well, every statement by you --

MR. FLEISCHER: And what were those statements, Helen?

Q -- that you don't believe in nation-building.

MR. FLEISCHER: What were the statements that I made that would
indicate that?

Q And the President's campaign.

MR. FLEISCHER: What statement in particular, if you're going to
accuse the President of changing policy?

Q The President said he didn't -- I can't give you word for
word.

MR. FLEISCHER: Right. But here -- I can.

Q But he said in the campaign that he did not believe in
nation-building.

MR. FLEISCHER: Helen, I can give you word for word. And what the
President said is that the purpose of the military should be to fight
and win wars. The President has always believed in helping strengthen
nations, and that's why the United States has been Afghanistan's
largest supplier of food, health care, all the items of foreign aid
that we provide to help build an infrastructure.

Don't confuse that, which the President has always supported, with
the use of the military as peacekeepers, the use of the military to do
things other than fighting and winning wars.

Q So he doesn't believe that any military should be used to
protect our people who are there, who are trying to help?

MR. FLEISCHER: The President believes the purpose of the military
is to fight and win wars. And part of that is training the Afghanistan
army, so the Afghanistan army can provide the security that a sovereign
nation should have.

But it's a very different question. The President and the United
States have always supported the economic support, the financial
support we were doing in Afghanistan even before September 11th. We do
it, for example, for the Palestinian people, as well. So that's an
integral part of America's foreign policy.

Q Then he equates nation-building with peacekeeping forces,
right? That's what you're saying?

MR. FLEISCHER: I'm -- what the President has said is that the
military should be used to fight and win wars. The President does
believe in helping nations to grow, to be successful. And you can call
that nation-building if you want; the President has always been for
that.

Q Well, the first time he mentioned the Marshall Plan, and it
related to that. This is massive aid.

MR. FLEISCHER: Helen, with all -- I think you're a little
confused about what the President said in the campaign and the
President's views about helping nations to grow and to be successful by
developing their infrastructure, and what the purpose of America's
fighting men and women should be for.

Steve?

Q Ari, what is the timetable for withdrawal from Ramallah as you
understand it?

MR. FLEISCHER: Withdrawal from Ramallah, as the President
indicated in the Oval Office, is contingent, from Israel's point of
view at least, on resolution of what to do with the people that Israel
claims are in Ramallah, in the basement of Chairman Arafat's compound,
who are accused of or responsible for the killing of the Israeli
Cabinet Secretary, Zevi. Israel has indicated that is what the hang-up
is in Ramallah. And there are efforts underway to help resolve that
issue. The President believes that once that issue is resolved, Israel
will withdraw expeditiously.

Q You're satisfied with that explanation, willing to let them go
along with --

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, listen, the President's point is Israel needs
to withdraw and withdraw from all of the West Bank. That is the
President's point. Israel makes a counterpoint. Their counterpoint is
that so long as these people are being held and protected, Israel
cannot withdraw. There's a difference of opinion on that. The
President continues to press Israel to withdraw.

Q So, wait, wait. You say, Ari, there's a difference of
opinion. But did the President not endorse that part of the occupation
this morning when he said he understands Prime Minister Sharon's
reasoning and, in fact, that those people were in the basement when
Secretary Powell -- he said, the President specifically said they
were there when Powell was seeing Arafat. Is it not fair to say that
the President endorsed that part of the Israeli military operation? He
said he understands the Prime Minister's position.

MR. FLEISCHER: And the reason that we are still working to bring
the parties together is to resolve that issue. So the President
understands the issue, he understands Israel is saying that they will
not withdraw until that is resolved. The President has given a blanket
statement, withdraw from the West Bank. The President is committed to
that blanket statement.

In the process of that, and this is what is so hard in the Middle
East -- the United States can call for it and will continue to press
for it, but the parties have to do it. We don't sit in the Israeli
tanks and we don't sit in Ramallah as the United States people. The
Palestinians do and the Israelis do. The job the President is
dedicated to is to find ways to help the Israelis and Palestinians come
together to resolve specifically in Ramallah the Zevi five, so that the
withdrawal can proceed.

Q If I could follow on that point. The Palestinians say, under
previous agreements with Israel, that if those five are to be charged
with anything, the Palestinians should handle it. Is the United States
saying, in this case, no; turn them over to the Israelis now?

MR. FLEISCHER: The United States is trying to help to resolve the
differences and that's a delicate bit of diplomacy that is ongoing. So
I'm not going to be able to get into the details of it. Hopefully,
that will get resolved and resolved shortly.

Q We need you to clarify something. You said there's a
difference of opinion on that. Are you saying there's a difference of
opinion between the Bush administration and Israel on their position
that they're not going to pull out until these guys are out? Or a
difference of opinion between Palestinians and Israel?

MR. FLEISCHER: When the President said Israel should withdraw from
the West Bank, he meant from the entire West Bank.

Q But he also said today that they should be brought to
justice.

MR. FLEISCHER: The President does think they should be brought to
justice; that's correct.

Q And you have said that he understands Israel's position that
they should --

MR. FLEISCHER: But, Ron, what --

Q -- he understand's Israel's position that they're not going
to withdraw until these guys come out. So why should we not conclude
--

MR. FLEISCHER: Ron --

Q -- that he's embracing, endorsing --

MR. FLEISCHER: Ron, if there was never any move by Israel into the
West Bank, the President would still say that the killers of Zevi
should be brought to justice. So whether Israel's troops are there or
aren't there, the President's view is consistent. If they killed an
Israeli Cabinet secretary, they should be brought to justice. That's
what the President is consistent in around the world about terrorism.
If people resolve -- go to murder to resolve political disputes, the
President thinks that's terrorism and they should be brought to
justice.

Q Can you say -- are you able to say yes or no to the
question, does the President believe that the siege on Ramallah should
continue until the Zevi five come out?

MR. FLEISCHER: The President believes that the people responsible
need to be brought to justice. But the President's statement from the
Rose Garden that Israel needs to withdraw and withdraw from the entire
West Bank stands.

Q But, Ari, should we take away from this that, since the
President's statement of a couple weeks ago that Israel should withdraw
without delay, further reinforced by Dr. Rice who said that means now,
he has discovered that there are extenuating circumstances regarding
Ramallah and Bethlehem and he's willing to let Israel take a little
more time in those areas to get those issues resolved?

MR. FLEISCHER: John, as the President said, Israel needs to
continue its withdrawal, and that's what the President believes.
Obviously, in the town of Ramallah and the town of Bethlehem --

MR. FLEISCHER: -- in the town of Ramallah and the town of
Bethlehem. Israel has said back to the United States that there are
particular circumstances which will not allow them to withdraw.

Q And he's comfortable with that?

MR. FLEISCHER: No, the President is comfortable with Israel
withdrawing, and withdrawing in comportance with what the President
said in the Rose Garden. What has happened, and throughout the Middle
East -- it's not just this issue, there are many -- that there are
issues that both parties raise, the Palestinians raise and the Israelis
raise, which does not allow them to immediately fulfil what the
President has called on them to do.

Q And he seems to accept what you seem to characterize as
extenuating circumstances in those two cases.

MR. FLEISCHER: Again, if Israel did not have troops in Ramallah,
the President would still say the Zevi five needs to be brought to
justice. If they have --

Q But they do.

MR. FLEISCHER: And the President believes that they need to be
brought to justice, and Israel needs to withdraw.

Q Okay, but is it fair to say, the President said -- in the
context of Israel does have troops in Ramallah -- the President said
they should be brought to justice and he understands Prime Minister
Sharon's reasons for keeping them there. The President said that with
the troops still there, with -- after saying the five should be
brought to justice, and a day after Yasser Arafat appealed directly to
the President of the United States, saying, I cannot go outside, you
have to get the Israeli troops out of here -- one has to draw the
conclusion when the next morning the President says, I understand the
Prime Minister's reasoning, that he is in fact endorsing the presence
of the Israeli troops there, until, as you say, this diplomacy can
continue to try to withdraw the handling of those five.

MR. FLEISCHER: Again, I think you can only go back and quote the
President. And the President said Israel needs to continue its
withdrawal, and that applies to all areas of the West Bank.

Keith.

Q -- ready for something else? Could the President foresee
signing an energy bill that does not include new rights to drill for
oil in Alaska?

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, let's see what the outcome of the vote is in
the Senate. I think that will happen shortly --

Q It just happened.

MR. FLEISCHER: Has it just happened?

Q Senate kills White House plan.

MR. FLEISCHER: As soon as I get official confirmation, I will have
something to share with you on that. Not that your media accounts
would not be fully accurate; I'm sure they are. I'm sure I will still
be here briefing as I get official reports to confirm what you just
said. So I will answer that shortly.

But if you don't mind, Keith, let's come back to that in about 10
minutes or so, and I will take that question and answer it. I'll just
wait to get confirmation.

Q On Afghanistan, is the President ready to make any changes or
-- of this war in Afghanistan? Because the king is back, and terrorist
activities are on the rise in the area or elsewhere, and more and more
tapes are coming from Osama bin Laden now; again, there is a new
announcement that more tapes are on the way. What's happening? And
who is behind -- is somebody misleading the United States about where
is Osama bin Laden? Or is the President not doing enough to get him
where he is -- maybe across the border?

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, keep in mind what the President said
yesterday. The President, in a public speech, said that as spring
enters into Afghanistan, that he does anticipate that the operation,
which has always been very dangerous, will get even more dangerous, as
a result of terrorists trying to regroup and as a result of the changes
in the climate, which will precipitate more potential difficulties.

And this is why the President, at every possibility, urges the
American people to keep in mind that this is a long war, and that there
still remain people who threaten us, who want to do us harm, both in
Afghanistan, as well as in the United States and around the world.

On to the question of Osama bin Laden; I think Secretary Rumsfeld
explained it very directly when he indicated that the facts are we just
do not know if Osama bin Laden is alive or not.

Q Ari, I have two questions for you, one on the Middle East.
President Bush will be meeting with Prince Abdullah, the Crown Prince
of Saudi Arabia, on the 25th of April in Crawford, Texas. Is the U.S.
government willing to participate in an international conference,
including Israel, the Palestinian National Authority, Arab countries
and maybe some European countries? Is that a position the United
States --

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the Secretary, the Secretary of State has
raised this issue, and it's an idea that is being discussed in various
circles in the Middle East, as well as in the United States. It's an
interesting idea. No decisions have been made about it.

But I do urge you to see a few of the events and put them in a
row. Yesterday, the President* of Lebanon was here, President* Hariri,
to meet with the President and discuss avenues to pursue peace in the
Middle East. The President this morning reached out to King Abdullah
of Jordan; the two spoke. The President next week will welcome King
Mohammed VI of Morocco. And following that, the President will also
meet with the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, Crown Prince Abdullah. So
there's a series of meetings that the President is undertaking directly
with some of the key Arab leaders in the region.

The Secretary of State remains in contact with those leaders and
Secretary Burns stayed behind from the Secretary's trip in the region.
So there continues to be an ongoing series of talks to try to follow
through on the President's Rose Garden speech, and those talks are
constructive and important.

Q Can I follow up?

MR. FLEISCHER: All right, follow up. And then Jay, with his new
haircut.

Q I want to ask a question on Venezuela. I was watching you
yesterday from Florida or the day before, and I saw the whole row here
ask about Venezuela. Today, the OAS is holding a very special
Extraordinary General Assembly, the 29th in its history. Foreign
ministers are going to come from all over Latin America to be present
at the meeting, and they're going to be discussing the Venezuelan issue
and the -- law. Will the U.S. take this opportunity to clear a lot
of the doubts that are still out there about the role it played or
didn't play, first in the removal of Chavez and then --

MR. FLEISCHER: As you heard from President Pastrana today, the
only doubts are vis-a-vis President Chavez and to make certain that he
is committed to democracy and to tolerance and to having a pluralistic
society. I think the United States was joined by the Organization of
American States, neighbors and countries, in the vote Saturday night.
And I think you're going to see continued unanimity with the United
States, shoulder to shoulder with our friends in the OAS about the
situation in Venezuela.

* Prime Minister

And the President addressed that this morning in the Oval Office
when he said if there's a lesson to be learned, it's a question of will
President Chavez learn the lesson, after the tumult that took place in
the streets that led to his fall and then to his return to office. So
we'll see what the events play out in Venezuela with President Chavez.
The President certainly hopes that he'll have learned the lessons and
will be a force for democracy in the region.

Jay.

Q Ari, the President today repeated his belief that Ariel Sharon
is a man of peace. And I wonder if -- how the President sees that in
view of the fact that Sharon has been explicitly in opposition to Oslo
and Madrid, those peace processes in his career -- has been a
principal advocate and implementer of a policy of building settlements
throughout the West Bank, a policy that's widely viewed by Palestinians
and other -- and non-participant observers as an effort to basically
expand greater Israel and reduce the size of an eventual Palestinian
state. Are these the actions of a man of peace, does the President
believe?

MR. FLEISCHER: The President has met with Ariel Sharon on numerous
occasions. And the President said what he said because he believes
it. He does believe that Ariel Sharon is a man of peace. The
President has met on numerous occasions with King Abdullah; he's had
numerous phone calls with the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia; he's met
President Mubarak, with President* Hariri. The President believes that
there are many people in the region who are men of peace and who seek
peace. And that is the group that the President will work most closely
with in an effort to try to forge an environment for peace.

And let me -- do you have a follow-up? I'm sorry.

Q Well, I was going to ask where the President stands on Oslo
and Madrid.

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the President is committed to implementation
of what Oslo called for, which is a renunciation of terrorism, a
renunciation of violence, and the vision, as the President announced it
at the United Nations, is for an Israel and a state of Palestinian to
live side by side.

This is just in. The Senate has just rejected the bipartisan
proposal to open a small portion of ANWR to

* Prime Minister environmentally responsible exploration. At a
time when oil and gas prices are rising, the Senate today missed an
opportunity to lead America to greater energy independence. The
President will continue to fight for the tens of thousands of jobs that
are created by opening ANWR, as well as, more importantly, for the need
for America to be able to achieve more energy independence that would
result from opening ANWR.

The President believes that it's vital for Congress to enact a
balanced, comprehensive, energy reform, that reduces our reliance on
foreign sources of energy, increases conservation and increases the use
of clean, modern and reliable sources of energy. The House has passed
comprehensive energy legislation, with strong bipartisan support. And
we'll continue, in conference, to work toward achievement of these
goals.

Q What effect would opening ANWR have on the current rising
price of gasoline?

MR. FLEISCHER: We're going to come back, John. There are a lot of
people in the back of the room --

Q Can I just -- since I had a question on the floor, follow
up?

MR. FLEISCHER: All right, because this was Keith's question, we're
going to go to Keith.

Q Would the President consider signing a bill that did not
include that provision, the ANWR provision?

MR. FLEISCHER: Again, the process, as you know, is the House
passes a bill, the Senate passes a bill. And we'll go to conference
and try to improve the bill from what the Senate passed. The purpose
of energy legislation is to make America more energy-independent. And
that's the goal of the conference, in the President's opinion.

Q I hesitate to return to this question of pullout in Ramallah,
but since we spent so much time in past years arguing over the
definition of "is" around here, we can now do the definition of "now".
(Laughter.)

Q Or "pullout".

Q Is the President comfortable with a sequencing that calls for
-- that would involve taking as long as it takes to resolve the issue
in Bethlehem and resolve the issue in Ramallah, and then do a complete
and full pullout? He does not see a way that the Israeli troops could
pull out before those two issues are resolved?

MR. FLEISCHER: What the President has called on Israel to do is to
withdraw from the West Bank. And as the President said in the Rose
Garden when he gave his speech announcing what he believed the
responsibilities were on all the parties, he talked about how this is a
process. And the Secretary's visit was a step in that process.

The process is ongoing. The process predated the President. The
process will likely postdate the President in the Middle East. What's
important is to continue to make progress, as the Secretary has already
begun. And progress in the Middle East is measured very slowly. And
the President is going to resist any temptation from others to try to
make him put a stamp on progress and put it in some type of time frame
for events that are not what will lead to lasting peace in the
Mideast.

Q His word, not ours --

MR. FLEISCHER: That's correct. And given what's happened in the
Mideast, the President also understands that it is a process. He's
recognized that. That's what he said in the Rose Garden. It's
interesting, President* Hariri, in his meeting with the President
yesterday -- and then the President* of Lebanon said it outside, too
-- he said that this is a process, this is a series of events that
takes time.

What's important now is that the diminution in the violence, the
lack of suicide bombings that have taken place, the commitment by
Chairman Arafat in the statement he put out last Saturday, all those
were important developments that took place as a result of the Powell
mission. Those now need to be followed up on. Those will be followed
up on. And, as part of that process, Secretary Burns remains in the
region and other contacts continue to be made to try to help the
parties to come together to further that process. It's not an instant
process.

Q And, Ari, that's my question. In terms of next steps, any
decisions this morning? Is Director Tenet going to go to the region
next week? Are we going to see a steady stream of American officials
going over there?

* Prime Minister

MR. FLEISCHER: No, I think the purpose of this morning was for the
Secretary to give the President and the Vice President the full,
in-person, detailed briefing about the conversations he had, the events
that took place. The process will continue.

And one of the things I think is very important, and the Secretary
stressed this in his meeting, is the humanitarian issue on the West
Bank. The United States currently provides $80 million of aid to the
Palestinian people through the United Nations. The Secretary announced
on his trip an additional $30 million will be provided. And, as the
President has said, at the end of the day, whenever Israel pulls back,
military force alone will not solve this problem. Kofi Annan said that
this afternoon, as well.

And it's important to continue to work with the parties so that
whenever the violence is at a level -- and the President hopes that
will be immediately -- whenever the violence is at a level that is
sufficiently reduced, political aspirations, political talks,
humanitarian assistance can really be focused on in earnest.

Q When the President talks about pullout from all of the West
Bank, is he including parts of Jerusalem, which is considered part of
the West Bank very often? And also on this international conference,
under whose auspices, where would it be, what would the purpose be?

MR. FLEISCHER: On the question of Jerusalem, or the question, for
that matter, of any of the actual borders or demarcations or security
points, or the question of the settlements, that is all what needs to
be negotiated. Those are all the issues that the United States would
play a constructive role in helping the Israelis and the Palestinians
come together on. That's the essence of the Mitchell process or the
Mitchell accords.

The second part of your question, on the conference, it's too
premature. The conference is in the idea stage, being something that
has just been discussed generally. Nothing beyond that, other than
ministerial level, as the Secretary announced it.

Q Is George Tenet going back to the region? Has that decision
at least been made?

MR. FLEISCHER: I have nothing for you on that topic.

Deb.

Q On an entirely different subject, the President has had lots
of nice things to say about Mayor Giuliani and Governor Pataki during
9/11. Andrew Cuomo, who's running against Governor Pataki, yesterday
suggested Pataki was just a coat-holder, played no role. Does the
White House have any reaction to that?

MR. FLEISCHER: I think you've heard from the President loud and
clear what a strong leader he believes Governor Pataki is, how Governor
Pataki has earned the support of New Yorkers in both parties --
actually, New York, in all five parties -- and the great leadership
and strength that Governor Pataki has displayed.

Q Palestinians say as many as 500 have died in the Jenin refugee
camp. Does the President want an investigation into this?

MR. FLEISCHER: The President has called for the United Nations and
the Red Cross to be permitted to have unhindered access to Jenin. The
President believes what's important is transparency, so all the facts
can be developed. Secretary Armitage said there's a mythology
sometimes to these events, where numbers are bandied about. What's
important is to find the facts. And that's why the President has said
that it's important to allow the U.N. and the Red Cross in to find
out.

Q Does he think the reports are credible?

MR. FLEISCHER: He'll be guided by the facts.

Jim.

Q There is talk in the U.N. and among independent analysts about
not just monitors, as the U.S. has embraced, but also an international
force, a peacekeeping force of some kind. What is the administration's
position on that, and is there any talk at all of participating in such
a force?

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, I noted that, in the Secretary General's
remarks, which were very constructive, he talked about the Powell
mission has lessened the violence in the region, as Kofi Annan said.
He talked about that there is no military solution to the conflict,
which is a position that the President agrees with.

He did talk about, I think his words were, "a military force of the
willing." Not the United Nations, but "a military force of the
willing." I'm not quite clear what that means, who that might entail.
But what the President believes is that if the parties agree to have
monitors there, that is something the United States would support.
That's a different type of question.

Q Monitors, obviously, are perhaps civilians, but unarmed people
not tasked with maintaining the peace; they're just there to report
-- to watch and report. The question is, he's talking about a
military force to actually enforce a peace. Does the U.S. have any
position on that?

MR. FLEISCHER: Again, I think his words were a coalition of the
willing. The President believes that if the parties agree to monitors,
that's the position of the President.

Q I'm trying to make a distinction here between monitors, who
just watch to see if the cease-fire is maintained, and those who are
actually there to enforce a cease-fire. "A military force of the
willing" suggests who might participate, but not the role they might
have. What I'm asking is, is the U.S. open to the idea of a military
peacekeeping force between Israel --

MR. FLEISCHER: I think I've done my best to explain to you what
the United States is open to.

Q You're only open to monitors, you're saying?

MR. FLEISCHER: In the back. Not you, Russell. Right behind you.
I'm sorry?

Q I'm sorry, is that right? You're saying --

MR. FLEISCHER: Yes, the position of the United States is
monitors. As I said at the beginning of the briefing, the President
thinks the purpose of America's military is to fight and win wars.

Q On the question of the four Canadians that were killed last
night outside of Kandahar, do you have any information about whether
the American pilot had permission to bomb in a known restricted
training zone?

MR. FLEISCHER: That is all being looked at by the Department of
Defense, and so I'd have to refer you over there. I can tell you that
the President last night called Prime Minister Chretien to express
America's condolences about the terrible accident that took place.

Q On that same matter, Ari, three times this morning the
President has appeared before the cameras, yet he hasn't seemed to take
the opportunity to address the deaths at all. Do you know why we
haven't heard from him on this?

MR. FLEISCHER: The President addressed it directly last night with
the Prime Minister.

Paula, and then Russell, and then in the back, and then Les.

Q The House is scheduled to vote on making the tax cut law from
last year permanent. Senator Daschle has already indicated he has no
intention of taking up that bill. One of his primary objections is
funding; he says that to fund the bill, you'd have to -- Social
Security trust fund. What is the administration's response?

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, the President is a very strong supporter of
making certain that the tax relief that was passed is permanent, and
that it's not taken away from the American people. I notice that
Senator Daschle did say that he would never schedule this. Well, that
means that he is always for reimposing a marriage tax penalty on
married couples across America. He is always for taking away the child
credits that have been given to families across America. He is always
for reimposing the death tax on small family farmers and on businesses
that count on abolition of the death tax to pass on their life savings
to their children. So that would be a regrettable stance, and the
President does believe that it should be made permanent.

Q And how does the administration expect a permanent extension
to be paid?

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, actually it's just a quirk of the budget
rules. It was paid for when it was passed in the first 10 years. And
under the budget rules, had it not been for, as you know better than
most, what's called the Byrd rule as a part of reconciliation package,
it would have considered fully paid for. So really all you're talking
about is the parliamentary procedures of the United States Senate.

Russell.

Q Ari, you said the other day that the United States is, "set in
stone against military coups of any kind." And yet there's a long
history of the United States organizing coups against democratic
elected leaders, including Arbenz in Guatemala, Mossadeq in Iran,
Allende in Chile, and Lumumba in the Congo. So when you said that
we're set in stone against military coups of any kind, were you
announcing a new policy or --

MR. FLEISCHER: Well, Russell, I think the examples you use are
interesting. I think when you talk about Iran, you just went back to
1954. President Bush came into office here in 2001. And one of the
great prides and success stories in American politics has been that in
the last 20 years, there has been a wonderful sea change in Central and
South America, brought on in large part as a result of people like Otto
Reich and Eliot Abrams and others, Ronald Reagan, George Bush, who
worked very hard to bring democracy to the region. And as a result,
there is a difference in the military in those regions.

And one of the big changes is the United States military has
cooperative programs with the militaries of the region are focused on
making sure that they adhere to the rule of law. It has been a
dramatic and very helpful change that brought democracy to the region.
And that's why President Bush traveled to El Salvador and Peru, to
highlight the importance of democracy.

And you do accurately point out -- I can't speak to every one of
those examples -- but there was differences in America's policy in
the past. And I think the government should get credit when changes
are made. And those changes began some 20 years ago, were continued by
successive administrations, including President Clinton.

I promised in the back.

Q First a chronology question regarding the deaths of the
Canadian soldiers. Do you know when President Bush was informed last
night, and when he spoke to Prime Minister Chretien?

MR. FLEISCHER: He spoke to Prime Minister Chretien at
approximately 8:00 p.m. last night.

Q And are there any plans for the two to converse today?

MR. FLEISCHER: I have no updates on that. If there is, I'll let
you know.

Q Finally, is there any concern at all about whether there is a
need to rethink the participation of other national forces other than
Americans in the actual military areas in Afghanistan as a result of
these deaths?

MR. FLEISCHER: No, this remains the actions of a very strong and
dedicated coalition that recognizes that it is important to stay firm
in the fight against terrorism. And unfortunately, as the President
said when he went to the Congress on September 20th, this fight against
terrorism, unfortunately, will risk the loss of life. And the
President regrets very deeply the loss of lives of anybody from any
citizenship who is fighting with us in Afghanistan. And that extends
directly to our good friends the Canadians, who lost lives last night.

Les?

Q In his constitutional obligation to see to it that the laws
are enforced --

MR. FLEISCHER: Les, are you wired for sound? You seem to have
some type of microphone on you today.

Q I am. You come out very, very nicely on it.

In his constitutional obligation to see to it that the laws are
enforced, the President does not believe that anyone who is
court-ordered to testify should be able to resist that order because of
his ordination or consecration, does he, Ari?

MR. FLEISCHER: Les, I'm really not sure what you're driving at.

Q Well, I mean --

MR. FLEISCHER: The laws -- the laws --

Q -- a person who is ordained or consecrated a bishop,
archbishop, or cardinal, say that because I'm ordained, I don't have to
obey a court order -- does the President believe that or not?

MR. FLEISCHER: Les, if your question is about judicial procedures,
I think you have to ask your question to the courts involved.

Q Well, what about the President? How does he feel?

MR. FLEISCHER: The President believes that the laws need to be
followed.

Q That's great. (Laughter.)

In his commendation, in its commendation of the President's speech
yesterday at VMI, the Washington Times contended this morning, "Gone
was the deplorable distinction that had taken hold in the White House
between terrorism as directed against the United States and which
justified military action in Afghanistan, and terrorism directed
against Israel, which apparently did not warrant retaliation." Is this
true or untrue?